Cornugon's Infernal Wounding ability needs clarification...

[Celtavian]

Cool, EN world and its boards are back up.

Read this:



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Infernal Wound (Su): The damage a horned devil deals with its tail attack causes a persistent wound. An injured creature loses 2 additional hit points each round. The wound does not heal naturally and resists healing spells. The continuing hit point loss can be stopped by a DC 24 Heal check, a cure spell, or a heal spell. However, a character attempting to cast a cure spell or a heal spell on a creature damaged by a horned devil’s tail must succeed on a DC 24 caster level check, or the spell has no effect on the injured character. A successful Heal check automatically stops the continuing hit point loss as well as restoring hit points. The check DC is Constitution-based.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



It needs to clarify whether a caster casting a heal spell that fails the caster level check has no affect as in no damage even if caused by other attacks is healed or just the 2 pts per round damage is not healed. It is unclear.

It needs to clarify whether or not this ability affects creatures who don't really care about wounds aka creatures immune to critical hits such as oozes, constructs, undead and elementals who aren't made of living flesh and blood.

The healing skill doesn't normally restore hit points on a successful check unless we are talking long-term care. What does it mean when it says a successful Heal check stops the bleeding as well as restoring hit points. Does a Heal check restore all the hit points lost caused by the 2 pts of damage per round? It needs clarification.

Anyone run up against a Corugon yet and have these same questions?

 

[Tiberius]

Cool, EN world and its boards are back up.

Read this:



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Infernal Wound (Su): <SNIP> The continuing hit point loss can be stopped by a DC 24 Heal check, a cure spell, or a heal spell. However, a character attempting to cast a cure spell or a heal spell on a creature damaged by a horned devil’s tail must succeed on a DC 24 caster level check, or the spell has no effect on the injured character. A successful Heal check automatically stops the continuing hit point loss as well as restoring hit points.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



It needs to clarify whether a caster casting a heal spell that fails the caster level check has no affect as in no damage even if caused by other attacks is healed or just the 2 pts per round damage is not healed. It is unclear.

It needs to clarify whether or not this ability affects creatures who don't really care about wounds aka creatures immune to critical hits such as oozes, constructs, undead and elementals who aren't made of living flesh and blood.

The healing skill doesn't normally restore hit points on a successful check unless we are talking long-term care. What does it mean when it says a successful Heal check stops the bleeding as well as restoring hit points. Does a Heal check restore all the hit points lost caused by the 2 pts of damage per round? It needs clarification.

Anyone run up against a Corugon yet and have these same questions?

I disagree that clarification is necessary. I think the rules above to be quite clear. To your first question, I would say that healing spells whose caster level checks fail are totally ineffective. After all, the ability says "... or the spell has no effect on the injured character." It fails to make any provision for special circumstances or partial healing, so the healing doesn't work.

As to your second question, the same principle applies. In the absence of text to the contrary, the ability must be assumed to work on all creatures.

As to the third point, I am of the opinion that the reference to Heal checks restoring hit points is an artifact from earlier versions of the rules that has survived the editing process. I base this opinion on the fact that the Heal skill is not anywhere else mentioned to provide immediate hit point recovery. Unless, of course, I'm missing a citation somewhere, in which case I would like that pointed out to me please.

-Tiberius

 

[green slime]

As I read it, it plays as follows:

a PC has been hit and is bleeding 2 hp / round.

a) casting a heal spell or the like will not cure the hp that have been incurred to that point, nor prevent the continued bleeding, unless a caster level check is made.

b) Failing the above, you can try to use a Heal skill check to stop the continuous bleeding. Should you succeed at the skill check, no damage you may have received is healed, but you are no longer bleeding every round.

Concerning the effect of an infernal wound on critical-immune creature, you could rule either way. Personally I think I'd have it damaging them, and the bleeding affecting Barbarians (ignoring DR*/-). As the wound has already been inflicted.

 

[Celtavian]

Re: Re: Cornugon's Infernal Wounding ability needs clarification...

I disagree that clarification is necessary. I think the rules above to be quite clear. To your first question, I would say that healing spells whose caster level checks fail are totally ineffective. After all, the ability says "... or the spell has no effect on the injured character." It fails to make any provision for special circumstances or partial healing, so the healing doesn't work.

Then this ability is more powerful than any other creature receives to my knowledge. It should substantially boost its CR much higher than it is. One strike of its tail causes a wound that causes all other wounds to be unhealable. Even Vile damage only works on Vile wounds.

I personally think the designer meant only the 2 pts of wounding damage for each infernal wound could not be be healed, not all wounds.

As to your second question, the same principle applies. In the absence of text to the contrary, the ability must be assumed to work on all creatures.

Could be, but considering how poorly worded this abilty is, I think it has more to do with poor editing. Why would Undead or Constructs care about wounds?

As to the third point, I am of the opinion that the reference to Heal checks restoring hit points is an artifact from earlier versions of the rules that has survived the editing process. I base this opinion on the fact that the Heal skill is not anywhere else mentioned to provide immediate hit point recovery. Unless, of course, I'm missing a citation somewhere, in which case I would like that pointed out to me please.

Once again, it seems like this ability was not edited for clarity. I think if the designer had reread their own words, they would have clarified that this ability only denies healing of the continuous damage, doesn't work on creatures immune to critical hits such as undead and constructs, and a Healing check either doesn't restore any hit points or just the hit points from the continuous damage.

Poor, poor writing on this ability IMO.

 

[green slime]

Re: Re: Re: Cornugon's Infernal Wounding ability needs clarification...

Then this ability is more powerful than any other creature receives to my knowledge. It should substantially boost its CR much higher than it is. One strike of its tail causes a wound that causes all other wounds to be unhealable. Even Vile damage only works on Vile wounds.

I personally think the designer meant only the 2 pts of wounding damage for each infernal wound could not be be healed, not all wounds.

And on this we agree. But that isn't what it states.

Originally posted by Celtavian (re: wounding crit-immune)
Could be, but considering how poorly worded this abilty is, I think it has more to do with poor editing. Why would Undead or Constructs care about wounds?

Because it isn't an ordinary wound in te least. It is a nasty supernatural infernal wound, that tears away at the very substance, of the body struck. "Bleeding" would then be regarded as a poor anology. More of a liquifying/burning/acidic/rusting of the creature's very being.

Could be better described, true.

 

[Celtavian]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Cornugon's Infernal Wounding ability needs clarification...

And on this we agree. But that isn't what it states.




Because it isn't an ordinary wound in te least. It is a nasty supernatural infernal wound, that tears away at the very substance, of the body struck. "Bleeding" would then be regarded as a poor anology. More of a liquifying/burning/acidic/rusting of the creature's very being.

Could be better described, true.

After rereading it, you're probably right. I was probably just so shocked by this change that I refused to accept that Cornugon's are not alot more dangerous and deadly than they were previously.

Our DM had our party go up against two of these. I was used to the wounding ability, but when he said none of our damage healed unless we made DC 24 caster level checks I was shocked. That, coupled with the DC 27 Fort saves for Stun, shocked me. The new fiends are very powerful, no longer creatures to trifle with.

I can get used to it. I still don't think it should work on creatures immune to crits with abnormal anatomies, but oh well, it is an infernal creature. I guess it can have strange abilties that affect creatures not normall affected by wounding.

All I can say is watch out for the Cornugons. They are unbelievably tough now.

 

[green slime]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Cornugon's Infernal Wounding ability needs clarification...

IAll I can say is watch out for the Cornugons. They are unbelievably tough now.

Thanks for the tip!

*Runs off with strange glint in eye, laughing maniacally*

mwahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

 

[TuDogz]

To the best of my knowledge I cannot target healing. In other words, I can't choose to heal this wound instead of that wound with a spell. As written the ability taints the person in such a way that healing spells don't stick to them. Any healing spells on any of your wounds. I like this Cornugon. I think my players need to meet one.

As to whether the designers meant for the effect to work this way, I disagree, I think this is exactly what was intended. After all the only real effect is the burning up of a few extra curing spells while you try to get past the DC 24 check. Get the first one to stick and the effect is negated no matter how many infernal wounds you have.

 

[Wish]

If you want to get to a really literal reading of the ability, any creature who has ever been subjected to this attack by a Cornugon can _never_ be healed of any wounds without the caster level check.

Two years later you cut your finger and it can't be healed without somebody making a DC 24 Heal or caster level check. There's nothing that says the caster level check is only needed once, or once per wound, or whatever.

 

[Celtavian]

re

If you want to get to a really literal reading of the ability, any creature who has ever been subjected to this attack by a Cornugon can _never_ be healed of any wounds without the caster level check.

Two years later you cut your finger and it can't be healed without somebody making a DC 24 Heal or caster level check. There's nothing that says the caster level check is only needed once, or once per wound, or whatever.

I know that an ability this powerful should have been better written, but please don't be this cruel to your players.